Greetings all, I'm currently selling all my Pentax gear to switch to Nikon. I have definitely decided on the new D800E. After including all the accessories I'll need for the D800E, I'll only have enough money left to purchase one lens. I'm 85% a nature and landscape shooter. I probably use a tripod 70% of the time. So my question is if you all owned a D800E and was limited to just one lens, which would you choose? My short list so far is the 24-70mm f/2.8G or the 24-120mm f/4G VR. Of course as soon as I'm able to save enough money I'll be adding more lenses, mostly primes but definitely will eventually want the 70-200mm f/2.8G VRII. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Nothing wrong with your choices. If you don't need a lot of speed you could consider the 28-300. That is a huge range in one lens. You could also consider backing up a few generations to lenses originally designed for 35mm film. Those AF-D lenses should work fine on a D800E and then you could afford many lenses.

Since you have elected to purchase the 800e version you are going for ultimate sharpness so I suppose you want to purchase only the sharpest lenses which can be obtained. This is an odd one: "the Voigtländer 40mm f/2 SL-II is a tiny, ultra-high performance normal lens." You might want to research it.

Hello Donald, Thanks for the advice on the Voigtländer 40mm f/2 SL-II, what a beauty little pancake lens. It reminds me of the Pentax M 40mm f/2.8 Pancake back in the day. I loved all the old Pentax A and M manual focus prime lenses. Will surely miss those aperture rings and distance scales. I'm not sure though about manual focus lenses for my future. I want the full advantage of the D800E's auto focus capabilities. I have diabetes and really struggle with blurry vision now.

The two lenses have different advantages. Obviously F2.8 vs F4. The 24-120 is a bigger range and has VR. The 24-70 is faster and sharper I believe. This is a kind of a toss up depending on which features are more important to you. If you want a more versatile range and/or VR the 24-120 is the way to go. If you want faster F2.8 glass the 24-70 is a nice lens.

If you do in fact plan on the 70-200 in the future I would maybe say to pair it with the 24-70 as they kind of "go together" as part of the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 trinity.

If you opted for primes instead you could get something like the 24 F2.8D, 50 F1.8G, and 85 F1.8G instead for about the same price.

Final note I would say that if you came from a DX or cropped sensor body before you might be saddened by the telephoto range of 120mm on FX since it is only 80 mm on a DX body...if you like to shoot animals at all. You could use the D800 in crop mode, but you lose the full benefit of the camera then.

Yes jvossphoto, I rely on autofocus myself because my vision is no longer 20/20, or even close to that.

However, look at the photo of the distance scale on that 40mm lens on KR's site. It seems at f8 everything from 10 feet to infinity will be in focus. If that is correct you really don't need to focus at all for landscapes. Just use f8 and set infinity to the left 8 on the DOF scale and all will be in focus.

KR also says there is a hard stop at infinity and I notice at f8 with the lens set at the infinity hard stop everything from 20 feet to infinity should be in focus. So just set it at the infinity hard stop.

Hello tcole, No worries about coming from an APS-C sized sensor. All my gear was from 35mm film days. I want my 24mm wide angle lens to be just that and as for the telephoto advantage, a person can just crop in post processing or shoot in crop mode as you say.

I like your suggestion about going for the 24-70mm f/2.8G if I'm gonna have the 70-200mm f/2.8 down the road. I just can't make up my mind about the advantage of VR with the 24-120mm option or the 24-70mm f/2.8 if it is sharper. I do want to take total advantage of the D800E's resolution.

That's a very good point Donald. I suppose all good manual focus primes with focal range from 50mm on down will be able to use hyperfocal focusing to shoot most all landscape situations. Plus you would have the advantage of compact light lenses. I have also been checking out the Zeiss manual focus primes for ultra-wide angle through standard focal length.

jvossphoto said:
Hello tcole, No worries about coming from an APS-C sized sensor. All my gear was from 35mm film days. I want my 24mm wide angle lens to be just that and as for the telephoto advantage, a person can just crop in post processing or shoot in crop mode as you say.

I like your suggestion about going for the 24-70mm f/2.8G if I'm gonna have the 70-200mm f/2.8 down the road. I just can't make up my mind about the advantage of VR with the 24-120mm option or the 24-70mm f/2.8 if it is sharper. I do want to take total advantage of the D800E's resolution.

I am not sure VR would be the deal breaker for me, even though I like it a lot. If the only reason you are considering the 24-120 is because of the VR then I wouldn't worry about it that much. If the D800 performs as we are all expecting it to then an F2.8 lens and raising the ISO to get the shutter speeds you need then VR won't really be necessary. If you had two identical lenses one with VR and one without then obviously most would opt for the VR unless there was a drastic price difference. On the other hand if you are opting for the F4 instead just to get VR then you lose a stop to gain maybe theoretically 3 (so only really gaining 2) I think the ISO performance should make up for. Of course a tripod and monopod always work well also.

I am lusting for a D800 myself. I have the 70 - 200 2.8 VRII. If the 24 - 70 2.8 is anything like the 70 - 200 in IQ then that is the way to go. And I think it is. That would be my "you can only have one lens" lens :-)

It will cost more than the 24-120 but a few month down the road you will have forgotten all about it

I don't know if this is adding to the discussion as it is more of a general comment. But, that 24-70 f/2.8 is bound to be scary sharp on the D800(E). The tiny pimples on my kids' face with that lens show up with such great detail that I don't know if it's now the best lens to shoot face shots with....and that is with a D7000.

But, if I could add some speculation to the discussion I feel that at least for now the 24-120 f/4 sounds like the best ONE LENS start if you're interested in landscape and nature. I just have a feeling that the 24-120 will perform even better on the D800 than the current FF cameras. If you're planning on getting the 70-200 f/2.8 in the future you might have to factor in a teleconverter for more reach - especially if you're going full frame and losing that 1.5x crop of DX.

Rx4Photo: I know what you mean, my D7000 can be too sharp also for portraits. I kept my old D80 just because it had a good soft setting for portraits. In the "olden" film days we would use a soft focus filter for portraits. Like this: http://www.adorama.com/NK77SF.html

You can go into Picture Controls and try to set up one custom to reduce sharpness but I don't know if that will be enough.

For a studio beast like the D800e I would be shooting my portraits with either a Zeiss 100mm f2, Nikon 85mm f1.4 or a Nikon 200mm f2. For landscape you've got a lot of options, but the 14-24 will perform the best with that sensor, although you might find the PC-E 24mm is really the go-to landscape lens considering its unique versatility. Im aware that I just recommended a pile of expensive glass, but with a camera like that who wants to cut corners?

Since it seems that people some have already skipped reading the OPs question and what they shoot:

jvossphoto said:
I'm 85% a nature and landscape shooter. I probably use a tripod 70% of the time. So my question is if you all owned a D800E and was limited to just one lens, which would you choose? My short list so far is the 24-70mm f/2.8G or the 24-120mm f/4G VR.

One lens? No brainer 24-120mm f/4G VR. Gives you wide, middle, and a bit of tele. Great all around lens. 24-70mm is great but if I had only one lens, I would miss the reach.

If the F-stop is not that big of a deal, and you want more compression or reach, the 28-300mm VR could be a option as well since you will be stopping down anyway.

tcole1983 brought up a good point if you don't mind primes, the 24mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8, 85mm 1.8 & 60mm macro would be about the same price and you could really do anything with those. Even if you just went with the 24-120, I would add either the 50mm or the new 85mm 1.8s to give you a bit faster or a better bokeh option.

If you're gonna drop $3000+ on such a specialized body then you really ought to get the best lens that suits one of the needs you'd like to satisfy most and also what makes the most sense to pair with the sensor. Id way rather be "limited" to one amazing prime and a D800e for a few months, make a bunch of cash with it by shooting under its constraints and then start shopping around later on to fill in the gaps. Unless I was shooting weddings with it I'd see no reason to slap a mid-range zoom on to it. And as someone who does a reasonable amount of landscape photography I can say that Id be happier than a pig in shit with a D800e and a PC-E 24mm. If you're willing to drop the $2000+ for the 70-200 then you're in the same ballpark, so its all about priorities, IMO.

SquamishPhoto said:
If you're gonna drop $3000+ on such a specialized body then you really ought to get the best lens that suits one of the needs you'd like to satisfy most and also what makes the most sense to pair with the sensor. Id way rather be "limited" to one amazing prime and a D800e for a few months, make a bunch of cash with it by shooting under its constraints and then start shopping around later on to fill in the gaps. Unless I was shooting weddings with it I'd see no reason to slap a mid-range zoom on to it. And as someone who does a reasonable amount of landscape photography I can say that Id be happier than a pig in shit with a D800e and a PC-E 24mm. If you're willing to drop the $2000+ for the 70-200 then you're in the same ballpark, so its all about priorities, IMO.

Absolutely. Why buy the 'e' then compromise on sharpness with anything but the sharpest option? It doesn't make sense.

jvossphoto said:
....I'm 85% a nature and landscape shooter. I probably use a tripod 70% of the time....

Hay Jerry,

Given your question, I would recommend you going with the 24-70 2.8. The fact that you will be using a tripod as well, VR is really not going to come in to play for "most" of your shooting. In fact, with the speed of the 24-70, VR is not needed.

However, the lens I would really recommend you to consider would be the 14-24 2.8. It is an amazing lens...I cannot wait to see some RAW photo's of it with the D800.

If you plan to save later for additional glass and have only one lens for a while, my vote is the 28-300. I have one for an all around lens with my D700. I also have the 70-200 VRII. On my D3s the 28-300 vs. the 70-200 VRII are almost identical IQ with the naked eye. (Trees about 100' feet away) I am sure one could get anal and pixel peep. But I like taking pictures better.

Closer in it shortens the focal length a bit. Not too bad.

The only thing is that, like other "do everything" lenses, it get quite long at 300mm. Almost twice its length!

dormant said:
It is difficult to find a Voigtlander at the moment. B&H and Adorama are both out of stock. I contacted one of the US distributors, who said it'll probably be about 3 months before they get new stock.

There are a couple of people selling them new on eBay, but for $600 compared to $449 at B&H.

Your original post caused me to research the issue and I just ordered one from Adorama. It is out of stock now and they don't know when it will come in; but I will be in line when it does! Seems to me it should be a great landscape lens with the D800.

jvossphoto said:
Hello dormant, So are you also considering a Voigtländer?

For $500 I don't think it is worth it unless you just really like the idea of if. In practice the IQ is no better than any AF versions of any Nikon lens. You can get a new 50mm F1.4G for about the same price.

MF with today's DSLRs, I find is a pain as the viewfinder screen no longer is set up for it. I have tried to shoot with all my old Nikkors but but me it "gets in the way" of making an image rather than enhancing the experience. You can buy aftermarket screens, but it will be a while until those are available for the D800. I would suggest playing with an old MF lens for a week before dropping $500 on one.

Maybe I have really great eyesight or something, but I find manual focus to be a snap and often find that the better MF lenses have vastly superior dampening that really allows one to be uniquely accurate with their focussing skills. It seems like a no brainer for portraits. My 200 is almost always on M when Im taking portraits and my 85mm 1.4 is the AI-S version, so Im in that world almost full time. Then again you're speaking from a DX view finder perspective, so maybe thats the reason for the discrepancy.